Evidence used
- No CISA KEV confirmation is currently recorded.
- EPSS is 0.49% for the current model date.
BlackTreeCVE IntelligenceFull vulnerability report · 2026
CVE-2026-11610High confidence
389-ds-base: 389-ds-base: heap buffer overflow in sasl_io_recv() via padded sasl unbind
389ds · 389-ds-base
Official source article: Red Hat RHSA-2026:36195 ↗. Check the applicable product and release in the original source.
8.8HighCVSS 3.1
Patch only the product branches with a verified fix
Fix availability varies by productHigh technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
R
Open reassessment dashboard →Operational reassessment
Published severity in operational context
Published severityHigh→Operational priority:High, unchanged from published severity.unchanged
Compensating controls
- Validate the affected product branch and deploy the verified fixed release.
- Restrict the affected network interface to trusted sources where business-safe.
- Monitor vendor guidance and exploitation sources for a material change.
Verification
- Confirm that the asset runs 389ds 389-ds-base and falls inside the recorded affected range.
- Verify the installed build against the product-specific fixed version after deployment.
- Validate exposure, authentication requirements and compensating controls in the actual environment.
- Reopen this reassessment when CVSS, KEV, EPSS, exploit evidence or remediation changes.
Remediation availability differs by product scope
Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
- Debian Security Tracker: 2 affected package states with no published fix
Distribution package intelligence
4 package statesRelease-specific package status
Debian, ubuntu findings are scoped to the named distribution, release and source package. An absent finding does not mean a package is unaffected.
Package result overrides the generic status
BlackTree has verified remediation for at least one product or source, but the relevant distribution still reports no fixed package for 2 affected package states shown here. Treat those rows as affected with no fix until that distribution publishes a fixed version.
Repository candidate not checked
A published vendor fix does not prove that a matching update is enabled and installable on a particular asset. Confirm the local package candidate before scheduling remediation.
| Distribution release | Source package | Vendor state | Fixed version | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debian trixietrixie · source | 389-ds-base | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian bookwormbookworm · source | 389-ds-base | Affected, no fix publishedDebian currently tracks this release as open. | Not published in this feed | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Debian sidsid · source | 389-ds-base | Vendor fix publishedDebian records a fixed source-package version for this release. | 3.3.1-1 | Debian Security Tracker ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
| Ubuntu 24.04 LTSnoble · standard archive | 389-ds-base | Under evaluationCanonical reports that the package might be affected and still needs evaluation or fixing. | Not published in this feed | Canonical Ubuntu Security ↗Source updated 5 Oct 2026 |
High technical severity; prioritise exposed affected systems while verifying vendor guidance. Verified remediation exists for at least one product or source, but 2 structured product or package states remain unresolved. Apply remediation only to the exact product branch confirmed by its source.
Fix availability varies by product01
What, why and how
A heap buffer overflow flaw was found in the SASL I/O layer of 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). After a successful SASL bind with integrity protection (SSF > 0), an authenticated attacker can send a specially crafted oversized LDAP UNBIND packet that is copied into a 512-byte heap receive buffer without a bounds check in sasl_io_recv() in sasl_io.c. This allows up to approximately 2 megabytes of attacker-controlled data to overflow the buffer, causing a denial of service (server crash). In FreeIPA and Red Hat Identity Management deployments, any domain user with a valid Kerberos ticket, any enrolled host, or any service account can trigger this vulnerability over the network after authenticating via GSSAPI. The vulnerable code path has existed since approximately 2013 (389-ds-base 1.3.2) and was not addressed by the CVE-2025-14905 fix, which patched a separate heap overflow in schema.c only.
What
A heap buffer overflow flaw was found in the SASL I/O layer of 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). After a successful SASL bind with integrity protection (SSF > 0), an authenticated attacker can send a specially crafted oversized LDAP UNBIND packet that is copied into a 512-byte heap receive buffer without a bounds check in sasl_io_recv() in sasl_io.c. This allows up to approximately 2 megabytes of attacker-controlled data to overflow the buffer, causing a denial of service (server crash). In FreeIPA and Red Hat Identity Management deployments, any domain user with a valid Kerberos ticket, any enrolled host, or any service account can trigger this vulnerability over the network after authenticating via GSSAPI. The vulnerable code path has existed since approximately 2013 (389-ds-base 1.3.2) and was not addressed by the CVE-2025-14905 fix, which patched a separate heap overflow in schema.c only.
Why
A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
What
A heap buffer overflow flaw was found in the SASL I/O layer of 389 Directory Server (389-ds-base). After a successful SASL bind with integrity protection (SSF > 0), an authenticated attacker can send a specially crafted oversized LDAP UNBIND packet that is copied into a 512-byte heap receive buffer without a bounds check in sasl_io_recv() in sasl_io.c. This allows up to approximately 2 megabytes of attacker-controlled data to overflow the buffer, causing a denial of service (server crash). In FreeIPA and Red Hat Identity Management deployments, any domain user with a valid Kerberos ticket, any enrolled host, or any service account can trigger this vulnerability over the network after authenticating via GSSAPI. The vulnerable code path has existed since approximately 2013 (389-ds-base 1.3.2) and was not addressed by the CVE-2025-14905 fix, which patched a separate heap overflow in schema.c only.
Why
A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
How
An attacker operating through a network path may attempt exploitation with low privileges. If successful, the issue may disrupt the affected service.
02
Exploit reality and attack path
CVSS severity, EPSS forecast probability, public exploit material and CISA-confirmed exploitation are separate signals.
Observed exploitation No confirmed evidence
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No CISA KEV match was present at the last successful refresh. This means no confirmation from that source, not proof of no exploitation.
Public PoC / exploit material None recorded
?
Confirmed exploitation and public exploit material are separate signals. Attacks can occur without public proof-of-concept or exploit code.No exploit-tagged reference or CISA SSVC proof-of-concept state is currently recorded. Research may still exist outside the structured feeds.
- Likely attack path
- a network path → Heap-based Buffer Overflow → disrupt the affected service
- Attack surface
- Network
- Privileges required
- Low: a basic authenticated account is required
- User interaction
- None
- Attack complexity
- Low: no specialised conditions are recorded
- Security boundary
- Unchanged: impact remains within the vulnerable component's security authority
- Weakness
?
CWE means Common Weakness Enumeration: a standard category for the underlying weakness. - CWE-122 ↗
CWE-122: Heap-based Buffer Overflow. A heap overflow condition is a buffer overflow, where the buffer that can be overwritten is allocated in the heap portion of memory, generally meaning that the buffer was allocated using a routine such as malloc().
- CVSS vector
?
CVSS means Common Vulnerability Scoring System. The vector records the metric values used to calculate technical severity. CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:HCommon Vulnerability Scoring System 3.1: the compact vector below is decoded into plain language.
AVNetworkAttack vector: The vulnerable component can be reached over a network.ACLowAttack complexity: No specialised conditions are required beyond attacker-controlled input.PRLowPrivileges required: The attacker needs basic user-level privileges.UINoneUser interaction: No action by another user is required.SUnchangedScope: The security impact remains within the vulnerable component's authority.CHighConfidentiality impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.IHighIntegrity impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.AHighAvailability impact: A successful attack can cause a major loss.- Post-exploitation / living off the land
- No specific living-off-the-land technique is confirmed in the structured sources. Monitor normal administration tools for activity inconsistent with the affected service's baseline.
03
Patch and workaround
Operational remediation based on structured source evidence.
- Status
?
Patch availability is based on structured fixed-version fields and authoritative update references. If no fix is verified, check the vendor advisory before making a change. - Fix availability varies by product
- Affected
- 389-ds-base: 1.3.2 ≤ 3.3.0
- Fixed
- Red Hat Directory Server 11.5 E4S for RHEL 8: 8060020260702180044.0ca98e7e < *
- Red Hat Directory Server 11.7 E4S for RHEL 8: 8080020260702180836.f969626e < *
- Red Hat Directory Server 11.9 for RHEL 8: 8100020260702145313.37ed7c03 < *
- Red Hat Directory Server 12.2 E4S for RHEL 9: 9020020260703060155.1674d574 < *
- Red Hat Directory Server 12.4 E4S for RHEL 9: 9040020260703055735.1674d574 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10: 0:3.2.0-8.el10_2 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 10.0 Extended Update Support: 0:3.0.6-19.el10_0 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Extended Lifecycle Support: 0:1.3.11.1-13.el7_9 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8: 8100020260626120929.25e700aa < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Advanced Mission Critical Update Support: 8040020260629123121.96015a92 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.4 Extended Update Support Long-Life Add-On: 8040020260629123121.96015a92 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Advanced Mission Critical Update Support: 8060020260626130540.824efc52 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.6 Extended Update Support Long-Life Add-On: 8060020260626130540.824efc52 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Telecommunications Update Service: 8080020260630025241.6dbb3803 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.8 Update Services for SAP Solutions: 8080020260630025241.6dbb3803 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9: 0:2.8.0-8.el9_8 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.2 Update Services for SAP Solutions: 0:2.2.4-19.el9_2 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.4 Update Services for SAP Solutions: 0:2.4.5-26.el9_4 < *
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.6 Extended Update Support: 0:2.6.1-22.el9_6 < *
- Red Hat Directory Server 13.2: 1783452100 < *
- Action
- Use the product-specific evidence above. Patch only products with a verified fixed release, and keep every affected or under-investigation state without a matching fix in the remediation queue.
- Workaround
- No verified workaround is recorded. If business-safe, reduce exposure to the affected interface and allow only trusted sources until authoritative guidance is available.
04
Evidence and provenance
Published 7 Jul 2026 · Last source change 8 Jul 2026, 21:02 UTC · CWE-122 · Heap-based Buffer Overflow
CVE recordCVE.org · 5.2
CVSS sourceCNA
EPSS source FIRST · tracked since 2026-08-14
?
The date BlackTree first stored a score for this CVE from the daily FIRST EPSS feed.European sourceENISA EUVD · EUVD-2026-42026
Product sourceCNA
Remediation sourceCVE/CNA references
CWE sourceCNA
NVD statusNVD awaiting enrichment
Core structured fields are present and their contributing authorities are shown above.
Material change intelligence
View recent updates ↗What changed after publication
No material field changes have been recorded since change tracking began. Routine source refreshes and cosmetic edits are intentionally excluded.
CVE published
Fixed release or patch reference recorded
Technical terms and abbreviations used in this report
- CVE
- Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures: the public identifier for one disclosed vulnerability.
- CVSS
- Common Vulnerability Scoring System: a technical severity framework; it is not patching priority by itself.
- EPSS
- Exploit Prediction Scoring System: FIRST's estimate of the probability that exploitation activity will be observed in the next 30 days; it is a forecast, not confirmation.
- CWE
- Common Weakness Enumeration: the standard category describing the underlying software or hardware weakness.
- CNA
- CVE Numbering Authority: an organisation authorised to assign and publish CVE records.
- CISA ADP
- Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Authorized Data Publisher: structured enrichment added to a CVE record.
- NVD
- National Vulnerability Database: NIST's enrichment service for CVE records.
- CERT / CSIRT
- A computer security incident response team that publishes warnings or coordinates incident response.
- PoC
- Proof of concept: public material that demonstrates or helps reproduce exploitation.
- CSAF
- Common Security Advisory Framework: a machine-readable format for security advisories.
- LoTL
- Living off the land: abuse of legitimate tools or system functions during an attack.